Interesting Conflicts â?? SPL EBT Hypocrisy (by Chris Graham)

[Blue Moon 1,113]

Good piece here from Chris Graham.

 

Interesting Conflicts – SPL EBT Hypocrisy

 

 

September 12, 2012Leave a comment

 

The news that Celtic have been cleared of any culpability for the EBT they used for Juninho in the 2004/2005 season comes as no surprise to those of us who have followed this case and the people prosecuting it. However, I do feel it is worth highlighting as it is yet another example of the hypocrisy and corruption at the SPL.

 

It is worth noting some things regarding the operation of EBT schemes. The issue of whether tax was paid on the EBTs has nothing to do with the SPL investigation into Rangers. The issue is purely whether the loans from the EBT scheme for players were declared to the SPL and SFA and whether they required to be declared.

 

It is clear that Rangers did not specifically declare them because they do not consider them to be payments. The whole point of the scheme is that they are loans. That leaves us only with the question of whether they required to be declared i.e were they payments.

 

Now, those who demand Rangers be punished like to muddy the waters by talking about HMRC, unpaid tax, sporting advantage and higher moral considerations. The only consideration for the SPL, however, is were they payments and were they declared.

 

The SPL have decided that Rangers have a case to answer. Today they have decided that Celtic do not. This is curious in relation to the above since, on the 23rd May, the BBC claim to have written to all SPL clubs asking about use of EBTs. The following is exactly what they were told.

 

“BBC Scotland Investigates wrote to all of the Scottish Premier League’s member clubs and asked whether they had ever operated an EBT scheme.

 

Celtic confirmed that it established one EBT scheme in April 2005, which BBC Scotland understands was for the benefit of the Brazilian midfielder Juninho Paulista. The scheme was worth £765,000 but the club did not declare the trust payment to the Scottish Football Association or the Scottish Premier League.

 

The payments made to the trust were declared in Celtic’s annual report for 2004/2005, but in 2008 the club became aware of an event giving rise to a potential tax liability which was subsequently paid after agreement with HMRC.

 

The remaining 10 SPL clubs replied and confirmed they had never set up an EBT scheme for any of their employees.”

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-18169502

 

Now it is quite clear from this that Celtic did operate an EBT and they did not declare it to the SPL or SFA as part of Juninho’s registration. This makes the case absolutely identical to the Rangers case. So why is there no case to answer?

 

That is a difficult question. Celtic like to claim it is because they paid the tax that HMRC felt was due for the use of the EBT. This appears to be true but does not in any way impact on the registration issue. Either the EBT was declared on the registration or it was not. The issue of tax paid is one for HMRC.

 

When considering this, we need to know who actually investigated on behalf of the SPL. At the moment we don’t. It is well documented that Rod McKenzie of Harper MacLeod has conducted the investigation into Rangers. Harper Macleod are the SPL lawyers on this matter so it seems likely to be the case that they would have examined the Celtic case too. They can’t have though, because that would be as clear a case of conflict of interest as you could ever get. Harper Macleod are also Celtic lawyers and it would be unethical and utterly absurd for them to have been involved here.

 

So who at the SPL decided there was no case to answer? Was another law firm employed to investigate Celtic? If so, then why was this firm not also used to investigate Rangers given the issues with Rod McKenzie and Celtic’s lawyers doing so? If the BBC information is correct then how did these nameless investigators come to the conclusion that the evidence did not need to be examined by an ‘independent’ tribunal? It is clearly an identical situation.

 

Let me be absolutely clear. I think the SPL made the correct decision regarding Celtic. The idea that a sporting advantage was gained from EBTs is absurd. EBTs could never have been declared to the SPL because doing so would have rendered the whole point of them, a tax benefit, unavailable.

 

In a competition where there is no salary cap on players, the rules on registration exist purely to protect players and ensure that in areas of dispute the players can show exactly what they are contractually due. To my knowledge, no Rangers or Celtic players are complaining that they did not receive payments they were due.

 

The SPL investigation is a sham. It is an excuse to further attack Rangers. There is no sporting advantage, no ‘financial doping’, no match fixing. The fact that a player is being paid is important because that is why registration is needed – how much they are being paid is totally irrelevant. These claims are absurd and have been made specifically to inflame public opinion ahead of a pre-determined verdict.

 

If the SPL got it absolutely correct on Celtic then question should be why are they pursuing Rangers? The answer to that lies with the people conducting the witch hunt and it is about time the media in this country started doing their job and asked the required questions.

[Zappa 0]

Chris Graham right on point yet again. Quality stuff!

[the gunslinger 3,366]

someone at the SPL must explain the difference or the only sensible conclusion is its a witch hunt.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

if its the fact celtc have met their tax liability then so had we through the cvl.

[der Berliner 3,245]

someone at the SPL must explain the difference or the only sensible conclusion is its a witch hunt.

 

Asked this in another thread: answer to whom? We can demand whatever we like, but is there any authority who actually checks how the SPL is being run and what they do?

[GovanAllan 0]

Asked this in another thread: answer to whom? We can demand whatever we like, but is there any authority who actually checks how the SPL is being run and what they do?

 

Well you could say the courts of the land, when we drag the corrupt bastards through it shortly.

[ian1964 10,413]

Leggat:

 

REGAN AND DONCASTER AND AID TO CELTIC

 

THE fact that Celtic is the only club who would benefit if Rangers are robbed of five of their titles should have set alarm bells ringing on the sixth floor inside Hampden.

 

The Scottish Football Association chief executive, Stewart Regan, along with his counterpart at the Scottish Premier League, Neil Doncaster, should have provided the sort of leadership they are paid to provide to our game.

 

Unfortunately the old Lion Rampant of Scotland is being led by a pair of donkeys.

 

A pair of braying, snorting and apparently cowardly donkeys who don’t look strong enough to give a two- year-old a ride along the sands at Blackpool.

 

For instead of ensuring there was not even the merest hint of suspicion that there could be a conflict of interest, by keeping anyone from inside Celtic, or anyone associated with Celtic, at more than arm’s length from the process, Stewart Regan and Neil Doncaster have actually stampeded in the opposite direction.

 

Stewart Regan and Neil Doncaster have allowed the whole process of this suspiciously timed witch hunt into the Rangers EBTs – which the SFA and SPL have known about for ten years – to be highjacked by the one club which would benefit from Rangers being robbed of five titles....

 

Celtic!

 

It is an astonishing shambles which many believe verges on collusion and is certainly confusion.

 

Or at least it appears to be Stewart Regan and the Scottish Football Association, along with Neil Doncaster and the Scottish Premier League, wishing confusion on Celtic’s rivals...

 

Rangers!

 

Why else would Stewart Regan not have passed on to Rangers a copy of Lord Nimmo Smith’s report to the SFA about the EBT’s which Rangers say he commissioned and which Rangers insist he has a copy of?

 

Why else would Stewart Regan give every impression that he cosies up to Celtic chief executive Peter Lawwell inside the Hampden Boardroom after Lawwell was parachuted into the powerful Pro Game Board, despite having no previous SFA experience, just after Regan was appointed as chief executive?

 

Why else would SPL chief executive Neil Doncaster appoint Celtic’s lawyers, Harper Macleod, to collect evidence against Rangers?

 

Why else would Neil Doncaster then unleash Celtic’s lawyer, Rod McKenzie, as his chosen attack dog to prosecute Rangers?

 

Why else would the SPL head honcho Doncaster allow the appearance to develop that Celtic lawyer, Rod McKenzie has either chosen or had an input in the selection of the three-man Scottish Premier League so called Independent Commission?

 

Why else would the man at the top of the SPL, Neil Doncaster, allow Celtic chief executive Peter Lawwell to gain recent privileged access to the SPL top table, despite the fact he had no previous acknowledged involvement with the SPL, whose board, Lawwell’s lackey, Celtic’s £250,000-a-year finance director Eric Riley sits on?

 

Why have Stewart Regan at the Scottish Football Association and Neil Doncaster at the Scottish Premier League done any of these things?

 

If not to give succour to cause confusion to Celtic’s rivals, Rangers and give aid and succour to the only club which would benefit from Rangers being robbed of five of their titles, Rangers?

 

For neither Peter Lawwell's SFA pal Stewart Regan or Lawwell's SPL chum, Neil Doncaster have presented themselves for scrutiny and questionioning over this whole sad, sorry, sordid affair.

 

Why?

 

Did I call Stewart Regan and Neil Doncaster donkeys?

 

Belay that!

 

Stewart Regan and Neil Doncaster are asses.

[der Berliner 3,245]

In essence, much of this is known. The problem simply remains that this information only revolves around in Scotland and mainly on internet boards, but hardly reaches those who can actually look into the matter. As the SFA is involved, the next port of call ... even for advice only ... would be UEFA and or FIFA (whether people think they are corrupt or not ... they will sure look for a way to deflect from their own deficiencies).

 

Why wait for this to go on any further. I am sure most of you as British citizens can call upon various people on this site and ask for help or assistance?

[DUDE 0]

someone at the SPL must explain the difference or the only sensible conclusion is its a witch hunt.

 

They do. But nobody over there can be arsed to comment on any of the numerous accusations. It's a joke.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

Asked this in another thread: answer to whom? We can demand whatever we like, but is there any authority who actually checks how the SPL is being run and what they do?

 

the press should be asking.